Review of Ewa Mazierska and Lars Kristensen (eds.) (2014) Marx at the Movies

This very good review by Bruce Williams in Film-Philosophy.

of

Ewa Mazierska and Lars Kristensen (eds.) (2014) Marx at the Movies: Revisiting History, Theory and Practice, London: Palgrave Macmillan. 293 pp.

 

includes a nice summary of my chapter:

In the realm of the classical cinema, John Hutnyk’s ‘Citizen Marx/Kane’ draws a parallel between Citizen Kane and Marx’s book (218-243). When read together, these two seemingly disparate works symbiotically enrich the viewer’s understanding of both. Through an exploration of such notions as the allegory of property, philosophic biography, and the fetishisation of objects, Hutnyk asserts that a Hollywood classic like Kane can render Capital relevant to the present day. He illustrates that what we see in the film that is not in Marx’s book ‘is the personification of a class system’ (240). For Hutnyk, a Marxist reading of Welles’ film serves to debunk the obscuring of the oppressive regime of capital and the alibis in the name of philanthropy that capitalists deploy ‘for their acquisitive plunder’ (240).

 

 

Read the whole review: Bruce Williams in Film-Philosophy.

Radiating Globality: Old Histories and New Geographies

Draft programme

International CONFERENCE

« RADIATING GLOBALITY / OLD HISTORIES AND NEW GEOGRAPHIES »

20-21 February 2016

Salle Viseoconférence UCAD 2, Cheikh Anta Diop

Dakar, Senegal

**************   O  **************

Programme

Samedi 20 Février 2016

09:00 – 09:15

Ibrahima Thioub, Rector – UCAD

Welcome adress

09:15 – 09:30 Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, History and Overview

09:35 – 09:50 John Hutnyk, Global Gifts and Capture

09:55 – 10:10 Discussions

10:10 – 10:30 Ben Baer, Regionalizing Socialism — (Pan-)African Exemplarities

10:30 – 10:55 Kanu Agrawal ‘The Role of Designers, Making Connections’

10:55 – 11:15 Joël Ruet, From Development Model to Emergence Toolbox? Agriculture & Industry in West Bengal, Yunnan and Senegal

11:15 – 11:30 Discussions

11:50 – 12:10 Lakshmi Subramaniam, Riverine regions and littoral spaces: mobile geographies and connected histories

12:10 – 12:25 Discussions

12:25 – 13:45 Lunch

13:45 – 14:05 Emmanuelle Kadya Tall, Cultu(r)al productions of the South Atlantic radiating globality: Mami Wata & the Twins

14:05 – 14:20 Discussions

14:20 – 14:40 Sylvain SANKALE, Thinking economic development in Senegal around 1820 Crossing experiences

14:40 – 14:55 Discussions

14:55 – 15:15 Break

15:15 – 15:30 Souleymane Bachir diagne, Comments

15:30 – 17:00

The Syndication of Plagiarism SZ: (For Nicole Pepperell)

Was reading and discussing with a comrade Dinesh Wadiwel about his stuff on animals in Marx, and took up discussion of the bit from Capital 1867 edn , cited by Endnotes 2, on animals as general equivalent (dropped in subsequent editions). This since I am giving a talk on related themes: Marx, Animals, India, a certain rhinoceros, in Senegal this Saturday.

But then I did a search of the phrasing (english trans of 1867 edn from Value Studies by Marx <download here>). There, discovered a bit of suspect website scrubbing.

Let me put it neutrally, and let the people decide <the people know I have nothing against Zizek, except for my polemic in Pantomime Terror, that is: (see here)

OK, this involves two instances of people we know using that quote. Nicole Pepperell’s one from her blog in 2008, and Slavoj Zizek from Less than Nothing in 2012. Of course there is no guarantee Zizek did not already use this phrase previously, because he has hardly ever had a thought that was not published two or three times (see below), but here the use of the exact same words does indicate some level of something more than general equivalence.
 .
What do you all think? See the attached screenshots if you don’t want to follow up, the first exhibit is Nicole from Rough Theory <full post here>, the second is SZ <Pdf here>.
Screen Shot 2016-02-16 at 23.30.35
and
Screen Shot 2016-02-16 at 23.29.51
***
Romping heterogeneity. Ba bah boom.
.
*********************
.
ahhh, and since SZ does the rerun thing so often, its also in a 2012 volume called God in Pain: Inversions of the Apocalypse, with Boris Gunjević <here>
Screen Shot 2016-02-17 at 00.16.11
***
AND syndicated in Italy and translated as a 2013 bog post: <here>
Screen Shot 2016-02-17 at 00.18.22
***
and then it circulates unawares, we get “Žižek says” in <this> otherwise fine piece:
Screen Shot 2016-02-17 at 00.35.17

Haircut for Marx in Algiers

In a post script to a letter he sent before leaving Algeria in the last year of his life, Marx, recovering a little from pleurisy and enjoying himself – ‘Nothing could be more magical than the city of Algiers; …it would be like the Arabian Nights’ (Marx to Jenny Longuet, 16 March 1882) – cuts off his hear and beard! He has himself photographed just beforehand and in a later letter from his next stop – Monte Carlo – to his daughter Laura, writes: ‘I enclose one photo for you, another for Fred”; no art can make the man look worse’ (Marx to Laura Lafargue, 6 May 1882).

Here is the last few lines and postscript of Marx to Engels (28 April 1882):

Screen Shot 2015-12-03 at 14.15.08

 

Solar Energy – Theory of Shit #2

Marx and Engels excrement archive. Here in 1882 Engels is talking calories, but the issue of waste matter comes up in the context of thinking food and sustenance and the reproduction of labour power. But what shines out most here is Engels anticipating Bataille’s thing about the sun and squandering of resources. Enviromentalistas take note.

Engels letter to Marx. 19 December 1882 411 (Collected Works Vol 46)

But this is by no means to imply that physical labour is economic  labour. The economic labour performed by 10,000 cal in no way consists in the reproduction,  complete or partial, of these same 10,000 cal in any form whatever. On the contrary, they are for the most part lost in the increased heat given off by the body, etc., and such useful residue as remains lies in the fertilising property of excretions. The economic labour performed by an individual through the expenditure of these 10,000 cal consists rather in the stabilisation over a longer or shorter period of the fresh  cal he absorbs from the radiation of the sun, and this is the only connection the latter have, so far as labour is concerned, with the first 10,000 cal.

and:

the working individual IS not only a stabiliser of present but also, and to a far greater extent, a squanderer of past, solar heat. As to what we have done in the way of squandering our reserves of energy, our coal, ore, forests, etc., .you are better informed than I am. From this point of view, hunting and fishing may also be seen not as stabilisers of fresh solar heat but as exhausters and even incipient squanderers

My previous Theory of Shit post on the bit from Volume III of Capital where Marx has a little section discussing the utilisation of ‘waste’ (Abfällen) in the production process, was here.